Fort Worth daily gazette. (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1882-1891, 1887-11-11
Commlssion OF Appeals.

The Gulf, Colorado and Santa Fe Rait-
way Company vs.. Calvin P. Fox; appeal
from Johnson. Suit to recover damages
for injuries alleged to have been ctflictea
on the wife of appellee by appellant. II
was alleged and proven that appellant
had notices posted in the passenger Depot
to the effect that all passengers WneA pro-
cured tickets would be carried At the Taess
of three cents mile; those who did not
procure tickets would be charged four
cents mile. Appellee and wife went to
appellants office in Fort Worth to pur-
chase tickets TO Cleburne. They arrived
before the ticket Office was opened; 1t
was only open short time
before the train started. That as soon ss
it wss opened, or appellee could get
ticket, his wife went Immediately TO the
cars TO take passage. That the approach
to the cars was over platform four er
five feet high, on s level with the plat
form OF the csr, end two feet higher than
the lower ep of the car. When she
reached the cara She attempted to step
aboard, when the car, without Warning g,
was VIOLENTLY jzrked and she
was thrown between the plAt-
form and cars. It was shown
that she struck on the cross-ties, Was
dragged several feet, when the train was
stopped. Also, that she was severely
bruised, was pregnant and a mis-
carriage resulted; was disabled
for eighteen months. Held: The
Court erred in Cvar1uling the
exception to that part Of plaintiff IS peti
ton charging negligence in the consrruc
ton of the platform, it not being shown
that persons could not easily step { # the
platform On to the highest step OF the car.
There are other facts in the petition how
ever which entitle appellee TO recovery
The court did not err in overruliDg the
exception to that part OF the petition
charging defendant with failure to put
tickets on sale within & reasonable time
before the departure OF the traln. Inc
court did not err in refusing to charge
the jury that If sppellee and his wife were
acquainted with construction Of the plat
form greater degree Of care was naces-
sary. The charge Of the court should be
so framed that it will clearly present the
issues made by the evidence to the jury
While the charge Is somewhat con-
fusing, we do not think the Jury
were mislesd thereby. If the wife OF ap.
pellee had been guilty Of negligence BY
waiting too long, and the person II
charge Of the train knowing she was at
tempting to board the same, gives thu
signal and the train is started, and appel
lees wife injured, appellant would b'
liable. The Judgment is affirmed. Malt
bic, P.J.
J. NJ. Mitchell vs.. ". M. Allen; eppea
from Esstlsnd. Suit by appellant agains
appellee to recover two promissory note!
executed by appellee to appellant. 1t Wa
alleged appellee obtained possession O
. the notes by fraud, and r, fused to return
them or pay them of. Appellee an
sWered that the notes were returned q
part payment on land sold and decided t
appellant. This was denied b
appellant Verdict for appelle
for 500 80 and judgment fore
| closing lien on land sol
by appellee to appellant as described il
? appeLlee's plea IN reconVention. Wit
J one exception there was no material erro
/ in the court below. Judgment was eI
, tered foreciosing the vendors lien. Thi
was error. 1t is disputed fact whethe
appellant had received deed to the LAND
t and the deed that he is alleged to have n
ceived being lost, there is nothing
3 the record to authorize foreclosure {
/ the lien on the land in controversy. r.
;, Tex. pa Counsel for appellee insi:
e that if we find the foreclosure of the lie
= error, that we reverse and render in fl
: vor Of appellee for the debt. In viev
J, however, OF the complications in refer
i ence to the title, we think where we d
b this, and execution issue, the land woul
r not sell for a fair price. We will r
y verse and remand, so that ifappells
e agsin secures Judgment the lien may
II properly foreclosed, and undisputed tit
1t may pass in the event of sale. Reverse
), and remanded. Nsltbie, P. J.
:, J. NJ Paul ct al. vs.. c. A. Willis ct al
: appeal from Bell. This was q suit
,e trespsss to try title which was institut,
st by appellees against j. T. Alexander
= al. for 1890 acres of land in Bell and Fsl
IS counties, patented to heirs OF Msthe
S. Byrne. patent No. 55S, vol. I, issued
ls May Is, 1850, by virtue Of bounty warra
ty No. 495. Ii is admitted that sppelle
at are heirs Of the said Mathew Byrne.
lie III. Paul ct ST.. who are admitted to be t
he sole heirs # James Paul, deceased,
e wham an administrators deed for sar